Just cause you have not seen one , doesn't mean there aren't any. Seems to me that a statement of that nature ,( there are no UFO's ) or no space beings, is in my opinion , awfully Arrogant of any Species. We as humans are too closed minded about a lot of things we don't understand. There is to my knowledge, no real proof either way. I personally feel, there are other beings out there, like us and different then us in lots of ways. beings coming here from time to time, to see what we are up to... Again it's my opinion. And you have yours , too which is each of our RIGHT to think .....

Saying that alien spacecraft don't come around Earth is not the same thing as saying they alien beings don't exist at all. Try not to level accusations of arrogance until you fully understood the person's opinion.

Scientifically, it is not acceptable to say "there is no real proof either way, so one opinion (that they exist, without any real supporting evidence) is just as valid as the other (that they don't exist due to lack of evidence)" unless you are looking for faithfully charged opinions.

I don't know if there are beings on other planets. I am open to both possibilities that they may exist or may not exist, but I'll wait for the evidence to mount before I state empirically that they exist while lacking evidence to support my views.

I have a photo of an UFO (unidentified flying object) which appeared on a slide I had taken in Trieste in 1966. It is a round reddish object surrounded by a bluish halo. I did not see it. I showed the slide to a professional photographer and he assured me that it was not a spot on the slide. I still don't know what it was.
Tullio

AFAIK no military intelligence in the world would care about a program searching for alien intelligence. The Royal Air Force has just closed a UFO documentation office involving just 2 people. There are no UFO.
Tullio

I disagree.

The definition for an Unidentfified Flying Object (UFO) does not include the requirement of an artificial or even extraterrestrial origin.
An UFO ist just an
Unidentfied (noone knows what it really was)
Flying (moving through the air or at least looking like doing so)
Object (of any shape, size, color etc).

There is no word about an extraterrestrial involvement.

The misperception comes from all the Hollywood movies way back from the 1950s and 1960s, where an UFO was set equal to an extraterrestrial spacecraft.

You should not do the same mistake.

From all the UFO sightings, there is a small percentage, which could not be explained. Exactly that are UFOs. Again, that doesn't say, that it were extraterrestrial spacecraft.

I know what a UFO is and have taken a photo of one. The RAF does not think of them as being of alien origin. This is what I meant. I should have explained it better.
Tullio

I think this is a very important distinction to make, that many people have forgotten about. UFO means, literally, Unidentified Flying Object. That's all. It doesn't automatically mean an alien spacecraft. A UFO could be a plane that is masked by clouds or reflecting the sunlight a certain way. It could be a cloud, or a bird, or a flock of birds, or anything really.

That said, I believe in UFOs. There are hundreds of things in the sky I can't always identify. Hell, one night a few years back I took a pic of an orange light flying patterns in the sky with no noise, no typical running lights, or anything. Turns out it was a candle kite, but at first it was a UFO because I didn't know what the hell it was.

So do I believe in UFOs? You bet. Do I believe they're alien spacecraft? No. Do I believe aliens visited Earth? I've seen no evidence of that.

Do I believe the government might want to cover up such a thing? Possibly, but with the millions of cameras, telescopes and radars belonging to private citizens and professional scientists watching the skies...something should have been seen by now. And good luck having any one national government try to silence something like that.

I come from a staid background in science and physics and journalism and I occasionally write on the subject of UFOs as an observer. Frankly, I think people LEAP to the conclusion of extraterrestrial interference because of the pop culture of the 20th Century and now 21st Century. That UFOs exist is a given. That they are extraterrestrial in origin is totally unfounded in every case. Read EVERY case. We have ZERO evidence that UFOs (and their motley occupants) originate from beyond the Earth. Pure and simple.

I have concerened 'SETI@HOME' for a long time. During the time my computer damaged several times, but culculation result remainded. Be so glad to those results remained in this sight. This actions in my computer is my proud and continue to many culclations of the Univers. Thank you.

The post you recommended reading DOES explain why V7 is slower. It does NOT explain why the resulting credits given are so much lower.

Example 1: my GTX670 GPU
A typical AP wu takes about 1 hour and grants about 700 credits. A typical V7 wu takes about 15 minutes and grants about 100 credits, or around 400 credits per hour.
Example 2: CPU only
A typical AP wu takes about 13 hours and grants about 700 credits, or about 2200 credits per day. A typical V7 wu takes about 3.5 hours and grants about 100 credits, or about 685 credits per day.

They used to be about even, but now APs rack up more than twice as much credit per hour of crunching than the V7 apps.

The post you recommended reading DOES explain why V7 is slower. It does NOT explain why the resulting credits given are so much lower.

Example 1: my GTX670 GPU
A typical AP wu takes about 1 hour and grants about 700 credits. A typical V7 wu takes about 15 minutes and grants about 100 credits, or around 400 credits per hour.
Example 2: CPU only
A typical AP wu takes about 13 hours and grants about 700 credits, or about 2200 credits per day. A typical V7 wu takes about 3.5 hours and grants about 100 credits, or about 685 credits per day.

They used to be about even, but now APs rack up more than twice as much credit per hour of crunching than the V7 apps.

That's the gripe -- not the fact that it takes longer.

If you are crunching for the credits, think of it like your job.
One day you go to your job and the Boss says your work is no longer
worth what he was paying you so he's going to pay you less from now on.

The post you recommended reading DOES explain why V7 is slower. It does NOT explain why the resulting credits given are so much lower.

Example 1: my GTX670 GPU
A typical AP wu takes about 1 hour and grants about 700 credits. A typical V7 wu takes about 15 minutes and grants about 100 credits, or around 400 credits per hour.
Example 2: CPU only
A typical AP wu takes about 13 hours and grants about 700 credits, or about 2200 credits per day. A typical V7 wu takes about 3.5 hours and grants about 100 credits, or about 685 credits per day.

They used to be about even, but now APs rack up more than twice as much credit per hour of crunching than the V7 apps.

That's the gripe -- not the fact that it takes longer.

And that gripe has been well aired in both this thread and over in Number Crunching. The problem is in how the CreditNew feature of BOINC (Not the Seti@Home software) grants credit. It is a complex issue that must be addressed by Dr. Anderson and the BOINC developers, and I understand it HAS been brought to their attention. Whether anything will be done about it is up to Dr. Anderson......Donald
Infernal Optimist / Submariner, retired

So the newbies total credit will be continually crushed by the "oldies" total credit because theirs was accrued by a more generous method than that of the current format. Thus, advancement within the ranks of we newbies, amongst the oldies will take longer and be more cumbersome. Thanks for the heads up.

So the newbies total credit will be continually crushed by the "oldies" total credit because theirs was accrued by a more generous method than that of the current format. Thus, advancement within the ranks of we newbies, amongst the oldies will take longer and be more cumbersome. Thanks for the heads up.

Um, basic math error here. The "oldies" recieved higher credit for a finite period of time. As time passes this will be a diminishing portion of the total credit awarded. Also, as time passes the "newbies" will be buying faster machines. Nothing continual about it.

Of course, all this only matters if the points actually meant something.